The Reds should not rule this out of hand. Remember, whenever you can get another organization to overpay for a closer, cash in. Washington is desperate. Really, really desperate. There will be other closers on the market for Dusty Baker’s Nats, but Iglesias is the best long-term option. He’s signed through 2020.

3.5 years of cost-controlled, 100-mph throwing Raisel Iglesias would be the biggest trade chip of the rebuilding process. The Reds should ask for and only settle for the moon. No harm done if they keep Iglesias. The return would have to be *by far* the biggest haul of the rebuild.

We’re absolutely not getting Turner. Doubt they’d want to give up Robles when they could likely find another closer without giving up their top guy. But Soto, Fedde, and Kieboom should be a possibility, at least two of the three and maybe someone like Luzardo. If I were the Reds I’d ask for Goodwin, Soto, Kieboom and one other lower rated/upside prospect.

I get it. We have no reason to trade Iglesias right now unless it greatly enhances our future. With that said, lots of relievers available. Robertson, Madsen, Hand, Neshack, Doolittle off the top of my head. They desperately need a reliever, they don’t desperately need Iglesias. He’s most likely the best combination of talent/control, but not the only option for them.
I think the Reds can still get excellent value for Iglesias without pulling out of talks that only start with Robles.

You all may be right. I love the idea of landing Robles. I don’t think it’s out of the question we could land him, I’m just doubtful the Nats make this move. I just wonder if we’re inflating Iglesias’ value a bit. Since moving to the closer role he’s performed at an elite level. At the same time all high level closers are probably overvalued. There’s still not much of a difference in save conversions between the elite and the average reliever. Unless those stats have changed recently. And they still only pitch about 65-80 innings a season. Price never did get around to revolutionizing the bullpen.

For those reasons, I would continue to explore any scenario that makes us better going forward.

The Reds hold the cards in this deal. I think they can hold out for Robles, because there are other teams that could use Iglesias too. And since the Reds have control of him for 3.5 years, they can just wait.

I agree completely. The Reds should take nothing less than what they think is top dollar. And yes, other teams will absolutely be interested in Iglesias. Listen to all offers, take nothing less than a deal you can’t say no to. I’d be interested to hear specifics of which other teams are interested.

I fully expect that to play out. I guess I’m questioning if Robles is the only player the Reds would seriously listen on. Say if the Nationals offer Soto, Fedde or Kieboom and Luzardo. That’s two of BA’s top 100 prospects and young LH with upside. That’s a good amount of talent there. Or the third piece could be Stevenson, or Goodwin, or whomever the Reds value that’s a little lower on the prospect rankings.

I realize that Iglesias is awesome, and valuable. I get what other closers have gone for. I also know the control is a quite a bit. I also remember not taking the opportunity to trade Chapman at the deadline. I also remember Iglesias has had shoulder surgery already once and throws at a high velocity. Then there’s the fact that as a reliever he will have a limited amount of innings to impact the game. Sometimes striking when the iron is hot is the right move.

But the Reds are in a great position to demand what they want and get back a great haul of prospects, or hold onto an elite reliever.

But that’s the thing. He’s our best bullpen arm. I only do the deal if it makes the Reds better in 2019. I want a big haul and talent that will arrive by 2019 or I don’t make the deal. Robles is probably the only one that fits that bill. Otherwise, I hold onto Iglesias so he’s in the back of my pen when I’m going for the playoffs in 2019.

Now, if you feel the rebuild is further behind, then sure, I’d move him for a lesser offer. It would be a bad signal though. Next year is year 4 of the rebuild. 2019 is year 5. Really don’t want to see a year 6. Otherwise, I’m talking to Votto about his no trade clause and explaining that he should waive it because we need to move him and we aren’t winning before 2020.

2019 is when I foresee the Reds being ready to compete, authentically. Hopefully we can sort out the starting pitching by then. Is Iglesias’ deal like Chapman’s in that he can opt into FA? If that’s the case and if he continues on like he has, he’ll start to cost more money. But arbitration is still so much cheaper than FA.

Fedde should arrive before 2019. Soto and Kieboom could reasonably be ready by midseason that year. But as far as offense and the bullpen, I think we have the pieces to be really good for a while. It’s the starting pitching that concerns me, but I like what I see from Castillo and Romano. Mahle has really come on strong, and I think Stephenson is making strides with his control.

The Reds have a deep and talented farm system now. That has been the big part of the rebuild thus far. I said when it started, I felt this rebuild might be a two-tier rebuild. By that I mean The Reds got a lot of prospects, but not really any elite prospects. Now it the time to aim for some of those and that’s where a guy like Iglesias comes in. Anyone that can get a guy like Robles should be made available. Particularly if you can get him with a closer, you should jump at the chance. Closers are the last thing you need in a rebuild.

Things to consider about the Nationals.
They have an owner with one foot in the grave, who wants a world series title BADLY before he kicks the bucket.
They have a 2 year window, the Bryce Harper Window, to win now. Before he is eligible for free agency. Other veteran contracts also will expire about that time also, or sooner. Werth, Zimmerman, Murphy, Rondon, Weitters, along with Harper.
Under normal circumstances the Nationals wouldn’t trade Trea Turner. But the Nationals circumstances are not normal. Iglesias gets the Reds Turner and one of Robles or Soto. Nothing less, or no deal.

I agree that the Nationals are likely feeling some pressure to make a move to win now and the Reds might be able to use that pressure to get a higher-than-expected return. I highly doubt it would include Turner though, as they likely see him as their starting SS for the present and foreseeable future.

I love the Reds, but that’s irrational for the Nats. Turner AND Robles?! Turner is more valuable now than Iglesias. If I’m the Reds, I’d do Iglesias striaght up for Robles or Iglesias and Cozart for Robles and another top 10 prospect.

Not that I want to trade Iglesias for him, but I see the Marlins are expected to have another fire sale, which means Yelich and Ozuna could be available. Yelich is a true CF while Ozuna could play there passably. Wonder what it would take to get either of them.

The Yankees got Gleyber Torres for 1/2 a season of Aroldis Chapman. Torres was a top-20 level prospect who’s highest level reached at the time was high-A.

Andrew Miller had 2-1/2 years of control left when he was traded for Clint Frazier. Frazier was also a top-20 prospect at the time, although he had already reached AAA.

Robles is now a top-20 level prospect playing in high-A. He played 41 games in high-A in 2016 with a 110 wRC+. So far in high-A this season he has a 153 wRC+. I wouldn’t be surprised to see him promoted to AA soon. (FWIW mlb.com has his estimated time to reach the majors as 2018)

I think it is totally reasonable to the Reds to ask for Robles back from the Nationals in a trade for Iglesias. I wouldn’t accept a trade that didn’t include him.

You’d certainly want to keep the rebuild on its current schedule which is apparently to start bearing fruit next year. If the consensus is that Robles is MLB ready next year (and he delivers) then that trade makes sense. Trading a rebuild building block (Inglesias) for a maybe two or three year down the road person (or people) doesn’t make sense.

Robles and Soto or Robles and Fedde don’t seem realistic. Robles would be outstanding, but I can’t see that happening, especially with the closer options available. With the SP injuries/inconsistencies, seems like the return should include a SP. Fedde and Soto might do it for me, and if there’s a third lower-level prospect, great.

If Robles can be had, then possibly a SP prospect such as Tyler Watson.

If the Reds can get either Robles or Soto with a SP, or Fedde with Kieboom or Stevenson, do it.

If it happens, who becomes the closer? Give Storen a shot. Maybe he will post good numbers and can be flipped. If not Storen, Lorenzen, Peralta, Hernandez?

There are two lists to compose if you’re looking at the Nationals system:

Group 1 (“You have my attention”):

1. Victor Robles, OF, Single A: Toolsy, but also has baseballs savvy, uses all fields, is a natural leader. Would give us a potential future outfield of Trammel, Winker, and Robles.
2. Erick Fedde, RSP, Triple A: Hard thrower with three plus pitches. Throws strikes and is near the majors. Coming back from TJ surgery, so Reds might get him on the cheap.
3. Juan Soto, OF, Single A: Another young outfielder. Not a gifted athlete, but a gifted hitter with great feel for the strike zone and emerging power.
4. Pedro Severino, CA, Triple A: With Mesoraco’s career with the Reds in limbo and the catchers in the system at least two years away, it would make sense to pursue a MLB ready catcher that would complement Barnhart. Severino is a defense first catcher that get’s high praise for handling pitchers.
5. Luis Garcia, SS, Single A: He may be a few years away, but he’s a high contact player with athleticism to stick at SS. He has room to develop and fills a position of need.

Group 2 (“No thanks”)

1. Carter Kieboom, SS, Single A: I know lots of people like him, but I just don’t see it. Not athletic enough to stick at short, not enough power to be a corner IF or OF, and a bit of a free swinger with not-so-great on base skills. Highly overrated.
2. Andrew Stevenson, CF, Triple A: Plays great defense in CF and has ideal leadership ability, but there are doubts that he will ever be more than average with the bat. I’ve had my fill of great speed no stick center-fielders.
3. Sheldon Neuse, 3B, Single A: See: Senzel, Nick
4. Rafael Bautista, OF, Triple A: Great speed, light stick. See #2
5. Austin Voth, P, Triple A: A fine prospect, but would have to get in line behind better prospects in the Reds system.

A right handed (Barnhart’s weak side) version of Barnhart, which we need. Severino wouldn’t be the centerpiece, but he’s be a nice throw in–especially when you look at how little certainty we have after Barnhart.

Granted, no one is untouchable, but every time I hear about the Reds possibly trading a top player under control for a couple years for a PROSPECT I despair that the end of the rebuild is in sight. When are we supposed to win again? Are we up to 2025 yet?

Francisco Cordero was about as effective closing games for us as Aroldis Chapman was. We have some bullpen depth and some solid pieces coming up. Between Lorenzen, Peralta, and Hernandez, we have some guys with stuff to close out games.

I hear you…but the injuries have made the reds winning window 2019 at the earliest….the more young elite players you can assemble together…the higher the likelihood of winning for awhile. #1 organizational prospects and top 10 mlb prospects are players championship teams must possess..

If I were DW…my #1 goal would be to build the #1 farm system in baseball by this offseason. Robles is a franchise outfielder…. Senzel is a cornerstone infielder…Stephenson was a top 12 pick at catcher and now Taylor Trammell and Hunter Greene will be players every team wants.

Ariel Hernandez and Wandy Peralta look ready to take on more.
Acquiring additional players could also create a trade opportunity with another team to fill in the gaps to compete for 2019 when the reds get to 1-2 players away.

Iglesias is a wonderful pitcher with control so the return needs to be a big boost to the franchise talent pool.

Nothing will surprise me. It would be just one more stupid move by the Reds to let him go. Get rid of Votto and his salary, “Homer for the other team” Bailey, or Mesoraco. When will someone with brains take over the Reds? It’s really tough trying to be a Red’s fan.

Votto has a full no-trade clause and is still providing an awful lot of value. Yeah, it’s a lot of money but have you seen the contracts lesser players are signing? If the Reds signed 2-3 other players for Votto’s salary, they wouldn’t be excellent players. They may not even be very good players. Good (not great) players are making 12-18 million bucks a year now.

The Reds are getting zero value on the Bailey contract but he’s been hurt. There isn’t a team in baseball that is going to pick up a player who’s coming off the missed time Bailey has had without the Reds taking on almost all the salary. At that point, since there is no cash savings to speak of, what’s the point of trading Bailey? The Reds need to hope he can come back and be effective for them, providing some value on that deal or making him at least marginally tradable. Mes is in the same boat and is now back on the DL with shoulder issues. He isn’t tradable either. When it comes to those guys, the Reds hands are tied. It has nothing to do with incompetence.

Nothing will surprise me. It would be just one more stupid move by the Reds to let him go. Get rid of Votto and his salary, “Homer for the other team” Bailey, or Mesoraco. When will someone with brains take over the Reds? It’s really tough trying to be a Red’s fan.

He isn’t really costing the Reds anything either, in fairness. Nothing being used but a roster spot. I’m good with him finishing the season as a primary starting player. The Reds need to finish evaluating him to figure out if he’s anything more than a utility player.

Agreed. I’m totally fine with him playing, I just wish it seemed like there was some coaching going on in the background about his approach. Maybe there is and he just can’t implement it, but who really knows?

Dick Williams said something interesting on the telecast today. He said he did not want to ” pull the rug out from under the team ” at this years trade deadline. If I understood him correctly his reason was that he felt this team had some momentum.??? I can’t quote everything he said, but it sure sounded like he didn’t want to trade anyone off if they were controllable beyond ’17. Could just be GM talk, but based on his comments I wouldn’t expect to see Iglesias traded at this deadline.

He also said that often times the deals that happen are never the ones discussed in media outlets (like Cozart). I gather that he’s not willing to make a deal unless it’s worthwhile, not to just make a deal

If it’s a Cozart deal, any 2 of the Nats top 10 prospects is good for the Reds. If Iglesias is in the deal, Robles has to be included also. My pet deal would be Iglesias & Hamilton for Robles, Fedde, Severino, & Luzardo.

The only way, and I stress only way I would trade Iglesias to them is if we command a kings ransom. They would have to give up
1. Robles
2. Fedde
3. Soto
4. Kieboom
5. This years first round draft pick Romero

They don’t want to give that. Thanks but no thanks and we keep arguably the best reliever in baseball for another 4 years.

All 5? For a closer? Way too much. That ask would probably get you hung up on. Robles, one of the others on the list, and a lower prospect would be a good initial ask. Getting Robles would be the main part of any deal in my mind, unless they wanted to part with Turner.

I know fans get frustrated when there is talk of trading a good player under team control, but the Iglesias situation is a bit different:

1) He’s a closer, a position that is consistently overrated as far as overall team value. If you can get a king’s ransom for any closer you take it. Serviceable closers are almost always available in the off-season; there’s no particular reason to fall in love with the one you have.
2) Understand that Iglesias’ injury history puts his overall trade value in constant peril. Reoccurring shoulder injuries are a real problem with pitchers (see Finnegan, Brandon).
He is, essentially, one pitch away from having no value at all. The fact that we have him under team control is nice, but it’s mitigated by the fact that he has a higher chance of serious injury that most pitchers.
3) The assumption is that when you trade an established player that you’re playing the long game. However, stockpiling talent can have immediate benefits. The Yankees got a king’s ransom for Chapman last year and are right in the thick of things this year. If you trade for AAA talent, many of them may make the show sooner than you think. Think about it, the Reds supposedly got hosed in the Frazier trade. Did we? With Schebler in right and Frazier batting less than his weight, it looks like we made out pretty well.

I argue with one poster on another site all the time over this very thing. He wanted only MLB players in trades (three journeymen crappy players that were in MLB was a good haul to him). I kept pointing out that even Kershaw, Pujols, Miggy and Votto were all just lowly prospects at some point (well, lowly well thought of prospects), and he never responded to that. He obviously realized how dumb it sounded to be anti-prospect for a rebuilding team.

The difference is that when you trade for an established major leaguer, you know what you’re getting. When you trade for a prospect, you’re hoping that player will someday develop into a major league player, but there is no guarantee of that. That’s why GMs are willing to trade prospects. It’s a much bigger risk to trade for a prospect than for an established player.

Trading Raisel seems pretty drastic but you never know? I’m sure DW will be taking a lot of calls and making some too. Just watching this last series…..Carlos Gonz can barely hit at this point and plays the outfield like Adam Dunn? Same formula as everyone else….try to get teams in contention to overpay.